PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BOTT vs. CZAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BOTT vs. CZAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT) and Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BOTT achieves a 25.46% return, which is significantly higher than CZAR's -1.18% return.


BOTT

1D
-2.12%
1M
2.80%
YTD
25.46%
6M
37.71%
1Y
84.77%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CZAR

1D
-0.81%
1M
-0.05%
YTD
-1.18%
6M
-0.33%
1Y
2.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BOTT vs. CZAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
BOTT
Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF
25.46%55.56%10.74%
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
-1.18%13.32%9.18%

Correlation

The correlation between BOTT and CZAR is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2024

0.49

The correlation between BOTT and CZAR shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BOTT vs. CZAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BOTT
CZAR

Industrials

41.2%
27.3%

Technology

17.9%
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
6.1%

Basic Materials

-

3.5%

Communication Services

-

2.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.8%

Energy

-

3.9%

Healthcare

-

8.2%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

2.7%

Financial Services

-0.0%
17.0%

Industrials

BOTT
41.2%
CZAR
27.3%

Technology

BOTT
17.9%
CZAR
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

BOTT
12.3%
CZAR
6.1%

Basic Materials

BOTT

-

CZAR
3.5%

Communication Services

BOTT

-

CZAR
2.3%

Consumer Defensive

BOTT

-

CZAR
5.8%

Energy

BOTT

-

CZAR
3.9%

Healthcare

BOTT

-

CZAR
8.2%

Real Estate

BOTT

-

CZAR

-

Utilities

BOTT

-

CZAR
2.7%

Financial Services

BOTT
-0.0%
CZAR
17.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BOTT vs. CZAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BOTT
BOTT Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
BOTT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BOTT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
BOTT Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
BOTT Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
BOTT Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank

CZAR
CZAR Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
CZAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CZAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
CZAR Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
CZAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
CZAR Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BOTT vs. CZAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT) and Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


BOTTCZARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.30

0.22

+2.08

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.95

0.39

+2.55

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.05

+0.32

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.77

0.28

+2.49

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.46

0.88

+6.58

BOTT vs. CZAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BOTT Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is higher than the CZAR Sharpe Ratio of 0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BOTT and CZAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BOTTCZARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.30

0.22

+2.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.33

0.68

+0.65

Drawdowns

BOTT vs. CZAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BOTT drawdown since its inception was -30.74%, which is greater than CZAR's maximum drawdown of -13.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BOTT and CZAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BOTTCZARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.74%

-13.38%

-17.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.74%

-9.54%

-21.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.03%

-3.92%

-12.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.76%

-2.18%

-4.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.40%

3.05%

+8.35%

Volatility

BOTT vs. CZAR - Volatility Comparison

Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT) has a higher volatility of 11.00% compared to Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) at 3.12%. This indicates that BOTT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CZAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BOTTCZARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.00%

3.12%

+7.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

31.00%

9.85%

+21.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.02%

12.24%

+24.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.32%

15.04%

+18.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.32%

15.04%

+18.28%

BOTT vs. CZAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BOTT and CZAR have an expense ratio of 0.35%.


Dividends

BOTT vs. CZAR - Dividend Comparison

BOTT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.11%, less than CZAR's 1.49% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
BOTT
Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF
0.11%0.14%1.74%
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
1.49%1.47%0.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


BOTT and CZAR have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BOTT has higher volatility (11.00%) compared to CZAR (3.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BOTT dropped -30.74% vs CZAR's -13.38%.

On 1-year performance, BOTT leads with 84.77% vs 2.67% for CZAR. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, CZAR has been the lower-risk option at 3.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BOTT has performed better with a 84.77% return vs 2.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BOTT and CZAR have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

CZAR has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.11% for BOTT.

BOTT is categorized as Robotics, while CZAR is Large Cap Blend Equities. BOTT tracks Solactive Global Humanoid Robotics Index, while CZAR tracks Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross.

BOTT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 0.22), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BOTT and CZAR

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer